IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jenpmg/v47y2004i6p899-920.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental capital: an information core to public participation in strategic and operational decisions—the example of river 'Best Practice' projects

Author

Listed:
  • Malcolm Newson
  • Liz Chalk

Abstract

Sustainable development and solutions to existing environmental problems depend heavily on information and its translation into usable knowledge. Increasingly, affected communities are being drawn into environmental decision-making, both in the development of strategy (plans) and in the delivery of plans through management and operations. Variants of the 'natural capital' theme are popular amongst those who see an effective dialogue between the sciences of ecology and economics as the most promising interdisciplinary context for environmental decision making by empowered communities. A decision-making framework is vital in practical, community-based schemes (wider than 'stakeholder platforms') which have become popular for promoting 'best practice' in managing river basin units. The EU Water Framework Directive renders use of interdisciplinary techniques within a participatory framework a statutory requirement. A final practical need for communities and professionals involved with such schemes is the creation of a system of adaptive (rather than reactive) management, supported by ongoing research and monitoring to detect, and adjust to, ever-changing physical and social contexts for both strategies and operations. This paper describes the authors' experience in applying the 'Environmental Capital' (also known as 'Quality of Life Capital' (QoLC)) approach to information management in two headwater catchments in northern England: the Wharfe and the Coquet. In the case of the Upper Wharfedale Best Practice Project (UWBPP) the components of basic environmental survey, consultation, strategy formulation and the use of the strategy are illustrated to guide immediate and longer-term actions. In contrast, the Coquet application of the technique, whilst socially more pervasive, was less successful for a number of reasons: geographical, institutional, project and participatory. As a proposed development of the methodology based on the authors' experiences, extending public participation through monitoring activity, together with formal application of environmental economics to the perceived elements of 'natural' and 'human' capital in the two catchments would appear desirable. Conclusions are also drawn regarding the demands of the EU Water Framework Directive for ecological, economic and participatory approaches to river basin planning and management.

Suggested Citation

  • Malcolm Newson & Liz Chalk, 2004. "Environmental capital: an information core to public participation in strategic and operational decisions—the example of river 'Best Practice' projects," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(6), pages 899-920.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:47:y:2004:i:6:p:899-920
    DOI: 10.1080/0964056042000284893
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0964056042000284893
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/0964056042000284893?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. María D. López‐Gamero & Patrocinio Zaragoza‐Sáez & Enrique Claver‐Cortés & José F. Molina‐Azorín, 2011. "Sustainable development and intangibles: building sustainable intellectual capital," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(1), pages 18-37, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:47:y:2004:i:6:p:899-920. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJEP20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.